TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Petition dismissed for delay and merits; employee not liable for TDS demand, employer held responsible under Section 192</h1> Petition dismissed by SC for both delay and merits. HC had held that where salary was paid after TDS deduction, the employer - not the employee - is ... Demand qua outstanding tax liability - seeking credit to the petitioner against the Tax Deducted at Source (TDS) by his employer - whether any recovery towards the outstanding tax demand can be effected against the petitioner in view of the admitted position that the tax payable on his salary was being regularly deducted at source by his employer who did not deposit the same with the authorities? - HC held [2024 (1) TMI 275 - DELHI HIGH COURT] since the petitioner accepted salary after deduction of income tax at source, it is his employer who is liable to deposit the same with the revenue authorities and on this count, the petitioner cannot be burdened. We find no substantial question of law to be considered by us in this appeal. Delayed filling SLP HELD THAT:- There is a gross delay of 532 days in filing the Special Leave Petition which has not been satisfactorily explained by the petitioner. Even otherwise, we find no good ground to interfere with the impugned order passed by the High Court. The Special Leave Petition is, therefore, dismissed on the ground of delay as well as merits. There is a 'gross delay of 532 days in filing the Special Leave Petition' which 'has not been satisfactorily explained by the petitioner.' The Court further holds that, 'even otherwise, we find no good ground to interfere with the impugned order passed by the High Court.' On both procedural and substantive bases the petition is refused: 'The Special Leave Petition is, therefore, dismissed on the ground of delay as well as merits.' All pending applications are adjudicated: 'Pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of.' The operative outcome affirms the High Court's order, with dismissal grounded in unexplained inordinate delay and lack of merit to justify interference with the impugned decision.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
